Rachel Riley awarded £50,000 in damages after winning libel case against blogger

For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails Sign up to our free breaking news emails Sign up to our free breaking news emails SIGN UP I would like to be emailed about offers, events and updates from The Independent. It was not reasonable for Mr Sivier to assume, without giving any reason for his belief, that Ms Riley would not comment, rather than provide her with an opportunity to do so Mrs Justice Steyn Mr Sivier defended the claim by arguing he had a “reasonable belief” it was in the public interest to publish the claims in the article. “The importance of giving Ms Riley an opportunity to comment prior to the publication of the article is particularly evident in light of the numerous matters on which Mr Sivier made assumptions.” There has been no retraction, amendment or apology to mitigate the damage to the claimant’s reputation or to provide any element of vindication. The award of damages, together with this judgment, will have to provide that Mrs Justice Steyn Mrs Justice Steyn said: “Whether or not one agrees with the views Ms Riley articulated in her second thread to Rose, Ms Riley expressed herself in a polite and cordial way, providing information to a teenager who had sought to engage with her, and who had said this was a topic about which she was just learning. “Even if it were established that the claimant has a reputation for being ‘highly controversial and offensive’, this would not show that she has a bad reputation in the relevant sector.” In January 2021, Mrs Justice Collins Rice struck out all three of Mr Sivier’s defences of public interest, truth and honest opinion, finding that they had “no prospect” of succeeding.